Sully didn’t look at this story closely enough. He initially reported on an article outlining how a father accused a school of discrimination when they sent the child home and made him undergo a psychological evaluation because he drew a picture of Christ on the crucifix, commenting that the outrage was “understandable.” I expect that kind of shallow knee-jerk reaction from less thoughtful types.

The fact is, the story was not was the story seemed to be. The child did not draw Jesus on a crucifix, he drew himself dead on the cross; the teacher was concerned that this might be a cry for help. Instead of being a suggestion that Christianity is a sign of insanity, it was a teacher rightly concerned for the well-being of a child who drew a heavily loaded image that could suggest suicidal or other troubling psychological issues, referring that child to a counselor to make sure they were all right.

What really makes the public ruckus surrounding this case clear is the following:

“It hurts me that they did this to my kid,” Chester Johnson, the boy’s father, told the Globe. “They can’t mess with our religion; they owe us a small lump sum for this.”

At which point the motivation for the father splattering this in the media becomes apparent.